Our Stupid Foreign Policy

In the ongoing war of words over who’s more willing to fight the “War on Terror,” former Vice President Dick Cheney says President Obama has made us less safe, while Obama says the policies of Cheney made us less safe. Obama’s right–Cheney did make us less safe. And Obama continues to make us less safe precisely because he continues the policies of Bush/Cheney. Arguing between the two is like debating whether it was mistress no. 4 or 40 that finally made Tiger Woods less safe from his wife’s lawyers.

But at least Woods, deep down, had to realize his behavior might one day come back to haunt him. And now Woods is learning the hard way about that nasty constant in human nature: retribution.

Cheney and Obama, on the other hand, have learned nothing. Ignoring that 9/11 was caused primarily by Islamists seeking retribution for constant U.S. intervention in their “holy land”-something Osama Bin Laden made perfectly clear–Bush/Cheney launched a pointless war in Iraq, giving al-Qaeda its best recruiting tool in its history. In his tenure, Cheney did absolutely nothing to fight the terrorist threat–his administration invested in it. Heavily.

Obama’s wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and whichever country next strikes his fancy, is a jihadist’s dream-a new American president, who despite promising “change” seems hell-bent on continuing with the same foreign policy as the last president. When former CIA terror expert Michael Scheuer was asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” this week whether U.S. efforts had succeeded in diminishing the terrorist threat, he said bluntly “I think it’s stronger than it was before 9/11, certainly because the support and opposition across the Muslim world to American foreign policy is far greater today than it was on 9/11.”

This phenomenon of opposition to American foreign policy translating into terrorist activity is so well-established, the CIA created the term “blowback” to describe it. Cheney and Obama not only refuse to address blowback, but instead squabble over who’s more willing to use torture or increase airport harassment, a conversation which does nothing to address the root problem of why terrorists want to attack us in the first place or why there are more terrorists now than before 9/11.

Could you imagine police detectives trying to stop a serial killer while completely ignoring his motives? Or how about if police simply dismissed the murderer as “crazy,” which is probably true, as many so-called “Islamofascists” are certainly not of the same mind as you or I. Yet in order to stop such a murderer, crazy or not, law enforcement still tries to get inside his mind, paying particular attention to certain patterns.

Our leaders in Washington refuse to look at motive or patterns when it comes to trying to prevent terrorism. Instead, we are told terrorists simply “hate our freedom,” as Bush put it. Obama might not employ the same language as Bush-something some Republicans laughably find “weak,”–but to date has still not offered a more substantive explanation. Canada is far more libertine culturally than the US, and this is precisely the sort of “freedom” that supposedly gets the Islamists’ goat. Yet strangely enough, Canada does not find itself constantly having to worry about Islamic terrorism–because terrorists don’t find Canadians en masse on Islamic land.

It is past time to ask the big questions. How can invading and occupying a nation stop an individual or a collection of individuals from carrying out terrorist acts? How can invading and occupying a nation, or a handful of nations, stop a terrorist network that exists in over 80 countries? What could our presence in Iraq, stepping up the war in Afghanistan, drone strikes in Pakistan, or a new war in Yemen possibly have done to deter the so-called “underwear bomber” on Christmas day? Would the Nigerian, would-be suicide bomber have been radicalized, or would a terrorist network be as available to accommodate and encourage his radicalization, if the U.S. did not have such a massive presence in the Middle East? Do terrorists simply hate our “freedom” or is there indeed a correlation between US intervention and terrorist recruitment and activity? Hell, let’s get extreme: would completely annihilating the Middle East through nuclear war finally eliminate the terrorist threat-or create the greatest terrorist threat in our history? Might such genocide make the Islamic world mad? Or just “freedom?”

Trying to fight terrorism by opening up more battlefronts is like trying to fight alcoholism by opening up more bars. It doesn’t make any sense. No doubt, the five-deferment, Vietnam-draft-dodging Cheney still thinks his belligerent rhetoric makes him some sort of a tough guy, but it doesn’t. It makes him stupid. And sadly–and at the expense of our safety–if the definition of “stupid” is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results, both Cheney and Obama’s foreign policies certainly fit that bill.

MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR

Hide 26 comments

26 Responses to Our Stupid Foreign Policy

Well Excuse Me but did I hear the word WAR, a definable legal concept with rules and regulations engraved in law? There are NO WARS currently LEGALLY waged according to US Laws and therefore WAR POWERS and WAR FUNDS appear used ILLEGALLY by CONGRESS, the EXECUTIVE and the COURTS. A President can declare a war in an Emergency but then at the next convening of Congress, the Congress must OFFICIALLY DECLARE LEGAL WAR on the enemy. Remember it has to be a real Enemy, usually one with country, airforce, nukes, etc. not a WAR on a WORD – TERROR – that is a war tactic. At the next meeting of Congress if Congress does not DECLARE LEGAL OFFICIAL WAR NO WAR FUNDS OR WAR POWERS CAN BE USED legally forward. Sure you can call it an insurgency or occupation or covert action, usually illegally but different rules apply to these, but those powers are limited and the funds usually secret, etc…

To violate the LAWS OF WAGING WAR, is to COMMIT TROOPS ILLEGALLY and steal WAR FUNDS illegally and KILL SOLDIERS ILLEGALLY and TORTURE PEOPLE ILLEGALLY and WAG WAR ILLEGALLY! No small abrogation of LAW, major crimes falling under the absolute definition of TREASON and SEDITION, we can hang ya for these crimes. Eventually, when this coup on country by our leaders is defeated, these WAR CRIMINALS WILL ALL BE TRIED TOO, including all those TWO FACED LYING POLITICIANS who voted to give WAR POWERS and FUNDS ILLEGALLY, sacrifice the LIVES OF SOLDIERS in false WARS, sacrifice the LIVES of the VICTIMS of our WAR CRIMES against their countries and STOLE the FUNDS to finance these CRIMES ILLEGALLY. Good riddance to all in Congress Repub or Dem who aided and abetted the ILLEGAL WARS GRANTING ILLEGAL WAR POWERS that have led to WAR CRIMES.

As our leader parade around, scaring you about WAR from TERRORISTS, to hide their crimes through fear mongering and misnomers like WAR and PATRIOT ACT, they all commit war crimes, except the few lone wolves in Congress who voted against the WAR CRIMES, say Kucinich, Paul, Gravel, and ??? What are we the PEOPLE to DO when the GOVERNMENT is committing CRIMES in our, the PEOPLES names? We the People are then compelled by the Constitution to bear arms and form militias to beat them out of office, if voting them out does not work due to voter fraud. Hijacking the vote already occurred like when the country went to Hell in a Bucket, when the Supreme Idiots voted the biggest loser President Bush into power by a 5-4 vote. At that moment in history we witnessed and did not PROTEST the usurping of our Democracy and they picked a DECIDER who was a DECIDEDLY EVIL GUY AND A WAR CRIMINAL. With this SUPREME TREASON to usurp the People Vote, went the very word Democracy and to fix the country we will need to reboot the country to that point and remove any one that Bush appointed, as his crown was gained illegally by voter FRAUD committed by the Supreme Court Justice, the 5 that appointed him. Prescott Bush should be proud of his grandson, Prescott’s companies seized for trading with the ENEMY HITLER in WORLD WAR II, leading to the death of many US Soldiers, his grandson followed well in his footsteps.
More @ http://iviewit.tv/wordpresseliot/?p=47

I wonder why so called Islamist terrorist do not attack say Austria North Korea Sweden ?

Do you anyone expected that when the petrol dry out from Middle East Americans will show any interest to be friendly with Saudy Iran Iraq ? I guess not.These countries will be as good as say Thailand or North Korea as far as Americans concern.

Islamist people as they call them all they want to left them alone and if Americans wants to be a police force of the world least they should be fair without double standards.I am sure everyone understand this but loosing face and prestige is the problem.

Doesn’t blowback require covert ops leading to citizens being unable to establish context?

Blowback doesn’t seem appropriate, as what we are doing now is out in the open for all to see, so it should come as now surprise and any American that pays even the slightest bit of attention should be able to put any retaliation into context.

Of course most of my fellow Americans have an extremely difficult time with the slightest bit of attention part.

Chase, you completely misunderstand the true goals of US foreign policy. Fighting terrorism is not the goal of our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. Nor is our goal the control of natural resources, bringing stability and democracy to those benighted people or even US hegemony for its own sake. We’ve been pursuing the same policies for 60 years, always with the same failures for our stated goals. Our leaders are neither stupid nor insane, so it’s time to start questioning the stated goals.

You need to look at the true institutional imperatives: 1) profits for the MIC and its investors such as Richard Perle, Michael Chertoff and Diane Feinstein’s husband, 2) campaign contributions, 3) pork for each state and Congressional district, 4) career enhancement for military brass, CIA officers and civilian government employees of the National Security State and 5) the need to keep the electorate distracted from domestic problems and divided so they can’t challenge the elite.

The policies are wildly successful. Only when we stop falling for the distractions and realize how depraved our government and leaders really are will we have any hope of changing things.

it is only with Videos like this one that the regular People of the USA will eventually come to their senses and will be anle to see that they were taken advantage of. all i can say is : BRING EM ON !
thank you.

This one of the best articles I have seen on the topic in a while. It takes what we all know and distills it into a concise argument for the radical change in America’s foreign policy. A clarion call for sanity. Is anyone listening?

The best commmentary by Bill Rood.
Right on the money. There is no moral compass in the US or its policies. Its fascism at its best. This is what moves what is left of the economy in the US…the business of war.

They want revenge because we slaughter vast amounts of their loved ones and countrymen. When we kill civilians their loved ones go through the same mental process the loved ones of 9/11 victims did, shock turns to grief, which turns to rage, which turns to a desire for revenge. As Charlie Reese pointed out: “The way a weapon is delivered does not make it moral, many Americans are so goofy they believe a bomb dropped from a military plane on civilians is more moral than a terrorist killing civilians with a rifle.” Robert B. Asprey said:’ Western nations have a long history of hypocrisy in the use of force. ” He also said:” It is hard for Americans to feel good about themselves without thinking they are better than everyone else.” He also said:” Throughout history much of what politicians, the media, and the generals call terrorism is actually counter terrorism, a reaction to military terrorism.” Robert B. Asprey was a marine captain who fought in Vietnam and an historian who wrote the genius book – War In The Shadows The Guerrilla In History

You are assuming our government actually wants to end terrorism. But what if their goal is exactly the opposite? Suppose they want to keep the “war on terror” going forever, because it serves to increase their power and their ability to take even more of our money than they already have?

There is a principle operating here that few people seem to understand. The interests of the rulers of a country and those of the people being ruled are not always the same. What is good for them is not necessarily good for us.

The US is in the last stages of Finance Capitalism, which is both monopolistic and imperialist.

Lenin, his eye on the Britain, Germany, and Austro-Hungary of his date, described it precisely.

Only slight adjustments have to be made to Lenin’s analysis. One is that the Colonialism of direct rule abroad has been replaced by a neo-Colonialism that uses puppet regimes, often concealed under the label “democratic”.

Also, the “War against Terror” is also a new development–it is an abstraction that allows endless war wherever the Finance Capitalists choose.

In short the US is in the midst of a quest for Capitalist world domination, economic and military.

It has already failed. The US is bankrupt and USD is no longer the world reserve currency.

Things will only get worse as long as these wars continue and there is no radical structural reform domestically.

There is no return, in foreign policy or economically, to the status quo ante.

…and no americans got to actually vote on this policy…since it was never a matter up for discussion in congress. We have no say. We have bases ALL over the world.

Now..on top of all that, and after calling insurgents “cowards” for hiding behind civilians, our own drones are piloted from the safety of the US, amonst civilians (thus legitimizing attacking on our soil)…
Yet after all that has happened…we don’t look at any possible reason for the hate we get. We are totally obtuse, and without self-anlysis, without even LOOKING at possible things we do that invite blowback, we just assume we are all “good” and kind, and right.
If we don’t have the courage to look at ourselves, we don’t have a chance to find out anything.
As far the xmas bomber, no one talks about a real solution, air marshalls (or equivalent) on EVERY flight. How ridiculous to spend money on one of MANY points of entry on a plane, yet once on the plane while in the air only a handful have air marshalls. If they did (instead of double dutying the flight attendants…who are not really qualified) they could have checked out the xmas guy in flight even at the latest point.
It’s all about the money.

A fine summary of the blowback issue and the apparent stupidity of our leadership. Kudos to David Smith and Bill Rood for their comments on the real goals as opposed to the announced purposes of our policies. If a policy continually fails to achieve its stated goals but we continue doing it, it is time to analyze who is actually benefiting from that policy and might have an interest in it continuing – a similar case is our “War on Drugs” underway for forty, or perhaps seventy, years now, with no success whatsoever in controlling the use of narcotics,and terrifying effects in states like Mexico that service our drug-using population and whose gangs are fighting for control of the huge profits created by the illegal status of these drugs. Yet we do not change it. Could it be that the DEA and the private prison industry and the pharmaceutical industry and the array of folks who believe that government should control what individuals do with their bodies (except if they are carrying guns) are actually very happy with the failed War on Drugs and would use all their political power to prevent any change? The same for our foreign policy…who benefits??? Not the ordinary American.

It is stupid to say that the policies of American leaders are stupid. They may be greedy, destructive, deadly, and needless but America’s rich are now richer than ever while their taxes are lower than ever. This is not an accident. American leaders are plutocrats and America is a plutocracy.
It is stupid to think that American leaders have or will act the way most American would.